tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9242710.post7907698504292199524..comments2023-10-31T07:23:17.922-04:00Comments on The Theos Project: A New Kind of ChristianJonathan Erdmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04234688186113838474noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9242710.post-54881839570705077452007-05-10T11:58:00.000-04:002007-05-10T11:58:00.000-04:00Thanks, good thoughts.Thanks, good thoughts.john doylehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05484728969355294193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9242710.post-58898286693636788122007-05-10T11:09:00.000-04:002007-05-10T11:09:00.000-04:00K,With the diversity in the American church both i...K,<BR/><BR/>With the diversity in the American church both in the present and in the past it is really hard to offer intelligent commentary, but I guess that's never stopped me before...<BR/><BR/>I think the living of life and our perspectives and outlook has changed so much that I think many people struggle with how to personalize faith in a relevant way. I think that in the past it might have been meaningful to simply have some theology or doctrine that you believed, but in this culture all beliefs are pretty much considered on equal ground. Doctrines are a dime a dozen. If those of us from the church try to converse with the average "man on the street" and tell him how our beliefs are the true ones the man on the street just kind of nods and smiles and says, "That's nice."<BR/><BR/>We live in the post-secular society where we are not altogether sure that we can live without spirituality, but not altogether sure how to go about a meaningful spirituality if, in fact, there is really no god out there.....This crisis of meaning affects the church as well. It's just that I think most of us aren't really having serious discussions about it. Some of our Pastors tell us we need take a hard line on truth, but this just doesn't seem to translate in the real world.Jonathan Erdmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04234688186113838474noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9242710.post-66185512787517476872007-05-10T10:26:00.000-04:002007-05-10T10:26:00.000-04:00I think that for many in this Postmodern era there...<I>I think that for many in this Postmodern era there is an existential crisis of meaning.</I> What is the nature of this crisis, would you say? Is it that the people inside the church no longer find their religion to have much meaning, or that people outside the church no longer find much meaning in their secular lives? My sense is that you're talking about the people on the inside, that the church seems out of touch with the real concerns of life. Okay, I can see that. I just wonder what it was about prior generations that they didn't experience this sense of disconnect between church and life. <BR/><BR/>My prior suggestion was that in every generation there's a minority of dissatisfied but idealistic Christians who want more than just a Sunday ritual, while the rest are fairly content. But maybe the contentment of the rest is slipping, the old routines are getting replaced by new routines that have nothing to do with the church. Since I'm out of that scene I don't know. Would you say that's true, that the kind of people who in prior generations used to warm the pews and go to potlucks now just drift off into other things?john doylehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05484728969355294193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9242710.post-81031391384628120262007-05-09T22:13:00.000-04:002007-05-09T22:13:00.000-04:00"Expressions"Yes. I think that you could reduce "e..."Expressions"<BR/><BR/>Yes. I think that you could reduce "expressions" of faith as something of a fad. My response, however, is that faith has to be something of a fad in the current context in order for it to be meaningful. So, organ music is a relevant expression of worship for one generation, and in another generation they need the guitar.<BR/><BR/>I, too wonder about the difference between contextual relevance and "fad". Isn't a "fad" the ultimate in contextualization? Of course, none of us want to reduce ourselves completely down to a "fad", right? We want something more "timeless" and "universal."<BR/><BR/>Ktismatics:<BR/><I>What do you mean by the epistemological turn? You'd say that it has increased in the last couple generations? And you'd say that your generation doesn't find as much meaning in epistemology as did prior generations? Please elaborate.</I><BR/><BR/>The epistemological turn of which I speak has to do with my <A HREF="http://theosproject.blogspot.com/2007/04/becoming-conversant-with-emergent.html" REL="nofollow">review</A> of Carson's book. I just get the sense that by-and-large the movers and shakers of the Evangelical world kind of take for granted that knowledge and epistemology should be privileged. But I think that for many in this Postmodern era there is an existential crisis of meaning. I truly believe that epistemological issues are important, but personally I see no reason to privilege knowledge.Jonathan Erdmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04234688186113838474noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9242710.post-55102154612061605062007-05-09T17:37:00.000-04:002007-05-09T17:37:00.000-04:00No? Okay, I'll leave it alone.No? Okay, I'll leave it alone.john doylehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05484728969355294193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9242710.post-78743034365851359932007-05-08T08:32:00.000-04:002007-05-08T08:32:00.000-04:00Yet the old expression of faith must be made meani...<I>Yet the old expression of faith must be made meaningful to the next generation, otherwise it slips into meaninglessness and irrelevancy.</I> I'm curious what kinds of expressions would have been attractive to the last couple generations that conveys less meaning to your generation. Organ music vs. guitars? Propositions vs. narratives? Potlucks vs. wine tastings? Expository preaching vs. whatever comes next? Inerrancy vs. errancy? To me some cultural changes just seem like passing fads, while others seem like improvements. Both fads and improvements have been part of every generation. Is there something else about contextual relevance that can't be described either as fad or improvement?<BR/><BR/><I>...my observations from inside the church indicate that the next generation(s) are having a hard time finding meaning in the previous generation's expressions of faith, particularly of the strong epistemological turn that Evangelicalism has taken and maintained and cultivated.</I> What do you mean by the epistemological turn? You'd say that it has increased in the last couple generations? And you'd say that your generation doesn't find as much meaning in epistemology as did prior generations? Please elaborate.john doylehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05484728969355294193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9242710.post-21665778344274861632007-05-08T07:47:00.000-04:002007-05-08T07:47:00.000-04:00"Fading world, "waning light, "setting sun," "vent...<I>"Fading world, "waning light, "setting sun," "venture ahead," "new" -- these are words of modernity extolling the progressive movement from a dead past to a brighter tomorrow....In short, I'm wondering whether McLaren isn't just offering his ideal modernist vision of what the cutting edge looks like and packaging it for the "young people," who in modernity always see themselves as the torch-bearers into the brighter tomorrow.</I><BR/><BR/>That's a good catch, and an insightful thought. I think I'm inclined to agree with you on this one. <BR/><BR/>I think this also goes to the debate on what "postmodernism" is. How much of it is radical and new - a decisive break from modernity - or how much of it is a continuation of modernity and an attempt to build a better modernity, but just call it <I>post</I>-modernity...Jonathan Erdmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04234688186113838474noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9242710.post-42988855499012080662007-05-08T07:41:00.000-04:002007-05-08T07:41:00.000-04:00So would you say that prior generations of Christi...<I>So would you say that prior generations of Christians were content to be bored and tyrannized by guilty conscience and rendered comfortably numb, and not until your generation did people finally begin to see something beyond all that?...I believe that in every generation most people want the same old things, whatever they happen to be; that only an exceptional few want something different, maybe even something better; that the world runs in ruts that are hard to climb out of, and most people are reasonably content to stay in those ruts because it's the ruts themselves that offer contentment; that boredom and irrelevance are both the blessing and the curse of such lives; that these phenomena affect the churched and the unchurched alike.</I><BR/><BR/>Good thoughts. Firstly, the issue is not that the previous generation did not have a meaningful and passionate faith. Rather, it is just that the expression of this faith and the way in which the faith was articulated and "worked out" in thought and praxis (and existentially) was in a particular way. Yet the old expression of faith must be made meaningful to the next generation, otherwise it slips into meaninglessness and irrelevancy.<BR/><BR/>Reflect on it from your hermeneutical study of texts: Once written a text becomes its own entity. It stands alone. The author dies, but the text lives on. The text was meaningful to the author, but it remains to be seen whether it will be meaningful to anyone else. And if it will be meaningful, how will it be meaningful?<BR/><BR/>That's how I look at the passing along of the faith. Yet what complicates things now is that the fundamental way in which the "postmodern" generation processes the world has dramatically changed. This is, perhaps, where I would disagree with your above comments that seem to indicate a codgerly and staunch view of the world that sees everyone as more or less static. Whether or not you are right might be something of another debate, but my observations from inside the church indicate that the next generation(s) are having a hard time finding meaning in the previous generation's expressions of faith, particularly of the strong epistemological turn that Evangelicalism has taken and maintained and cultivated. <BR/><BR/>I think this is because of a significant shift in how we process the world. You may disagree and view humanity as essentially static. Whatever the case may be I believe that the reason <I>A New Kind of Christian</I> and other books are so popular is due in large part to a need to restate and re-articulate the faith in this generation. This is exciting a lot of Christians, but at the same time making many believers very, very uncomfortable.Jonathan Erdmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04234688186113838474noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9242710.post-40321749308652188282007-05-08T04:03:00.000-04:002007-05-08T04:03:00.000-04:00Being part neither of the Church nor of Generation...Being part neither of the Church nor of Generation Y, I probably ought to just keep my mouth shut...<BR/><BR/><I>...the fundamental source of Dan’s discouragement is in the fact that for Dan’s church/congregation doctrine, practice, and church life has been drained of meaning.</I> Who is the church supposed to be meaningful <I>to</I>? What's it supposed to be meaningful <I>about</I>? If the church is supposed to be meaningful in and of itself, it becomes (as they say in PoMo lingo) a signifier cut loose from what it signifies and from those to whom it signifies. It becomes a set of structures and interrelationships and movements that never get out of themselves -- kind of like a schizophrenic who repeats the same ritualized behaviors over and over not because of some hope that eventually this task will reach completion but because the circuit-breaker doesn't work any more. Or is the church still committed to ritual and rigidity because of a compulsive fear of losing control?<BR/><BR/><I>But the question of whether or not we live in a new kind of world is essential to whether or not we need a new kind of Christian, is it not?</I> So would you say that prior generations of Christians were content to be bored and tyrannized by guilty conscience and rendered comfortably numb, and not until your generation did people finally begin to see something beyond all that? Sorry, I started slipping into sarcasm there. Put it this way: I believe that in every generation most people want the same old things, whatever they happen to be; that only an exceptional few want something different, maybe even something better; that the world runs in ruts that are hard to climb out of, and most people are reasonably content to stay in those ruts because it's the ruts themselves that offer contentment; that boredom and irrelevance are both the blessing and the curse of such lives; that these phenomena affect the churched and the unchurched alike.<BR/><BR/><I>"Will you continue to live loyally in the fading world, in the waning light of the setting sun of modernity? Or will you venture ahead in faith, to practice your faith and devotion to Christ in the new emerging culture of postmodernity?"</I> "Fading world, "waning light, "setting sun," "venture ahead," "new" -- these are words of modernity extolling the progressive movement from a dead past to a brighter tomorrow. <I>"It’s really cool to think that I might not have to keep switching back and forth and could just be one person all the time."</I> This sense of the unified self is another feature of modernity. In short, I'm wondering whether McLaren isn't just offering his ideal modernist vision of what the cutting edge looks like and packaging it for the "young people," who in modernity always see themselves as the torch-bearers into the brighter tomorrow.john doylehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05484728969355294193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9242710.post-88388641731677529472007-05-07T11:40:00.000-04:002007-05-07T11:40:00.000-04:00This is an interesting post and I'd like to commen...This is an interesting post and I'd like to comment further, but it might not be until tomorrow.<BR/><BR/>The biggest growth area for Christianity these days is Africa. Christians and Muslims are running neck and neck in converting the practitioners of the old tribal religions -- who I'd say definitely aren't postmodern. Europe is a much less churched place than the US. There are Christian missionary organizations from America than send missionaries to "post-Christian" Europe. I met an American guy who runs a mission church in Scotland (they meet in a pub).<BR/><BR/>France might be the home of most of the famous postmodern philosophers, but I'm not sure postmodernity as a big cultural change is on people's minds very much. I also doubt that it's the reason why Christianity isn't happening here. This is a historically Catholic country, so it's already suspect from an evangelical perspective. I get the sense (from reading mostly) that the two world wars really injected a lot of skepticism into the Europeans (and also the Jews). People are still nominally Christian for the most part, but are pretty much Christmas and Easter churchgoers. America was settled by strongly religious people, and that has left its mark on the culture ever since.john doylehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05484728969355294193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9242710.post-48504954802628021442007-05-07T09:38:00.000-04:002007-05-07T09:38:00.000-04:00So I'm interested...Obviously Christianity has sur...So I'm interested...<BR/><BR/>Obviously Christianity has survived more than one time based cultural shift and been accepted in many ethnic cultures around the world, some dramatically different from ours.<BR/><BR/>Do you think that when Christianity has ventured into these other cultures that it has faced similar situations? <BR/><BR/>Where new Christians produced at that time? Were Christians facing the same choice of hanging on to the old or discovering something new...or was the shift more subtle than this? <BR/><BR/>I think that it definately has happened before, but most of the shifts I can think of where earth shatteringly huge...do you think the shift/transition that McLaren is talking about is that huge or on a smaller scale? In either case, what kind of things changed and what stayed the same?<BR/><BR/>I'm also curious, because this has alot, alot to do with culture, how this would affect people in other countries where postmodernism may not be a way of life? I have no idea how postmodern countries outside North America and progressive Europe are, but I imagine it isn't the same as here.Melodyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10071513255237535104noreply@blogger.com